Do All Babies Really Go to Heaven When They Die? Pt. 1 | An Interview with Conley Owens

Warning, the following message may be offensive to some audiences. These audiences may include, but are not limited to, professing Christians who never read their

Bible, sissies, sodomites, men with man buns, those who approve of men with man buns, man bun enablers, white knights for men with man buns, homemakers who have finished

Netflix but don't know how to meal plan, and people who refer to their pets as fur babies. Viewer discretion is advised. People are tired of hearing nothing but doom and despair on the radio.

The message of Christianity is that salvation is found in Christ alone, and any who reject

Christ therefore forfeit any hope of salvation, any hope of heaven.

The issue is that humanity is in sin, and the wrath of almighty

God is hanging over our heads. They will hear

His words, they will not act upon them, and when the floods of divine judgment, when the fires of wrath come, they will be consumed, and they will perish.

God wrapped Himself in flesh, condescended, and became a man, died on the cross for sin, was resurrected on the third day, has ascended to the right hand of the

Father, where He sits now to make intercession for us. Jesus is saying there is a group of people who will hear

His words, they will act upon them, and when the floods of divine judgment come in that final day, their house will stand.

Welcome to Bible Bash, where we aim to equip the saints for the works of ministry by answering the questions you're not allowed to ask.

We're your hosts, Harrison Kerrig and Pastor Tim Mullett, and today we're joined by Pastor Conley Owens as we answer the age -old question, do babies really go to heaven when they die?

Now Conley, this is actually not the first time you've been on the show. We've had you on one time before when you came on to talk about your book,

The Dorian Principle. I think that has to have been, what, probably seven, eight months ago now?

At least, yeah. I can't quite remember, but it's been a while. How are you doing? I'm doing good. How are you?

Pretty well. We've been staying busy with the podcast, but it's good to have you back on.

I know we've been talking about how can we get you back on and what would we want to talk about, and I think we definitely picked a doozy of a topic to have you on to discuss.

You said, what could we have you on and what could we talk about? I think the way Tim put it is, what really pushes

Conley's buttons? Yeah. Tim has a knack for finding those things.

I was trying to get a feel for the kind of question that we could get a real passionate answer about.

As we were talking about it, this really is, this is like the sacred cow question of sacred cow kind of questions, and so we really wanted to have you on so that we could have plausible deniability and basically get you to say what we want to say, but we're far too afraid to say.

I've listened to your podcast. I don't think you're that afraid of anything. This crosses the line even for us.

The first question for you, Conley, is why do you hate babies so much? For the sake of the audience,

I think it's good to tell the story. Right before we were discussing, Tim said he was going to ask a question when we started.

I said, is the first question, why do you hate babies? It turns out that was the question. We did.

I sat Harrison down and I said, the first question I'm going to ask him is why does he hate babies so much? And you called it.

He did do that. He did say that to me. No, I mean, this is a topic that, it is assumed in the evangelical world in general that if a baby dies, the baby will automatically go to heaven.

And I literally can't think of any big name evangelical person who has taken the position that they don't just automatically go to heaven.

But then the problem is that as you read the Bible, one of the things that you're going to find is that it really is very difficult to make a case that every baby in particular, or any baby will automatically go to heaven.

And a lot of this is based on the assumption that there's some sort of age of accountability in the Bible. And so we do want you to answer the question, do all babies really go to heaven when they die?

But then is there any kind of age of accountability that the Bible teaches? Or where do people come up with that?

And what do you think about some of these things? Sure. Yeah. Let me start it off with a couple of the things that have come up.

First, you know, you didn't read like a full bio for me. So people don't know I have eight children and, and to be a little more somber,

I have had one miscarriage. So this is, this is something where one, I do love children.

Two, I recognize that this is a sensitive topic to people for very personal reasons.

My wife and I have had a miscarriage too. So. Okay. Yeah. So we're not, we're not coming at this from a place of total callousness and, and, and experience.

And, and then you also mentioned that you don't know of any big names who have, have taken a vocal stance on this.

I recall hearing someone at some point, and I don't remember if this was in person or on a podcast or what, but they said something small about this.

And then said they were considering writing their dissertation on it. And their advisor told them not to, because you don't want to be that guy.

And then they decided not to like, that's, that's really true. You know, it is just a very unpopular thing to say, but throughout the, the course of Christian history prior to the 18th century, this was a very common position that not all babies die and go to heaven.

So that's a new one. Yeah. I, we, we imagined that if there's anything that we would finally cross the line and get canceled about, it could possibly be this topic in general, but we'll, we'll see what happens with that.

But, but basically there's a, there's a historical case to be made to say that, you know, this isn't, this may be standard fare now, but it hasn't always been the case.

And so maybe you could elaborate on some of that. Right. Yeah. Or why do you think that is?

Why do you think it is that this has become so uniquely dominant right now? Right.

I guess I'd start off by saying there's a really great article written on this by B .B. Warfield. He was writing during the 1800s and he acknowledged that in his own time it had changed and he was trying to elaborate on why that is.

And he says that either logically or illogically both the reformed and the non -reformed positions are coalescing on this one.

So he was trying to stab at that question and yeah, it does seem that there's an introduction of, you know, humanism and the enlightenment and various things that seem to cause people to feel differently about the human condition and original sin and things related to topic, that topic, even those people who are of the most

Orthodox affirming these things, the way they end up practically applying them. So I don't have a lot of,

I don't know, really good thoughts about why this has changed, but it really has. And, and I'll, I'll add to that that the strongest traditions and by strong,

I mean, in a bad way, like the ones that are the most uncontestable are the ones that are unacknowledged.

And this is one that's unacknowledged. A lot of people don't realize that this is a new position. It's something that they think has been just said throughout the course of human history.

And, and that's a real shame. I mean, there's even, there's a pretty famous Spurgeon sermon that people refer to on this topic where Spurgeon, he seems to think this has just been the position of Calvinist except for Calvin, right?

This has been the position of Calvinist all the way back. Oh, and in fact, I think he actually, he also enlists

Calvin in his, on his side, which I would disagree with that take.

But anyway, yeah, a lot of people seem to think that this is just what people have always believed.

And if you really think that, then there's not a lot of reason to examine it. But if you realize, oh, wait, people have thought very differently about this before the past couple of hundred years.

Maybe I should re -examine what the Bible actually says. It feels like, you know, as you're trying to make a case for this, if you, if you put the emotion aside just for a second and you try to say, well, how can

I logically or biblically defend this case? It really does feel like you have to be an

Arminian to make this kind of thing make sense. Like I can't really make it make sense in the Calvinistic kind of framework.

And is that your observation about it? And you know, how to, how, if you were trying to make the case, like, does it feel, does it feel to you like you'd have to basically become an

Arminian to make it make sense? Right. Yeah. That's what I've observed. You know, everyone in the reformed camp, everyone in the

Calvinist camp, that argues for a universal salvation of those dying in infancy, even if they acknowledge original sin, they end up making some kind of practical denial of it where they say, okay, well maybe it's maybe

God would have the authority and he'd be just to damn, even an infant.

But is that really the kind of thing that he would do? You know, and when they're asking that, what they're implying is it would be wrong.

Right. And so they're making this practical statement that they're stating, you know, didactically that it would be just if he decided to condemn.

And then they're stating practically that it would not be just if he decided to condemn. It doesn't feel just, it feels like an emotional argument, but then how does that relate to the doctrine of original sin?

Maybe you can spell that out for some people who are not following original sin. The case.

Yeah. And maybe, maybe it would be worth it before that, if you don't mind, I'd like to give a couple of,

I think it would be worth talking about some statements that are any infants saved dying in infancy.

And then, and then second, you know, what kind of things break down if you end up denying this?

Cause there's, cause there's things other than original sin. I was going to ask you about are any or any or all, or, but yeah, go, go for it.

What do you think the best way to start? Yeah. So I, I have no reason to doubt that there are some who die in infancy that would be elect.

That's what reformed confession say. It's also, you have evidence in scripture that there are those who believe in infancy.

Psalm 22 verses nine through 10. David says it, you are he who took me from the womb.

You'd made me trust you and my mother's breast on you. I was cast from my birth and from my mother's womb, you have been my

God. And so there you have a statement of, you know, trust at birth. Now most

Christians know Psalm 22 is speaking prophetically of Christ. But even if you, even if you take this as referring to Christ, what it's describing is a work of God and establishing that relationship.

And so it's certainly something God is capable of and has done. And then maybe a better example even is in Luke one 15, there's a prophecy given that John the

Baptist will be great before the Lord. And he must not drink wine or strong drink. And he will be filled with the Holy spirit, even from his mother's womb.

And then what you see later in that chapter is that Elizabeth and Mary are in each other's.

Mary is visiting Elizabeth and John the Baptist is late in gestation. You know, if you look at the timeline, he's close to being the full nine months and Jesus could be possible quite possibly in his first month of gestation.

And John the Baptist, this prophecy that was just read is fulfilled.

And he leaps for joy in the presence of a savior and Elizabeth filled with the Holy spirit observes what has happened.

And so you hear have John the Baptist trusting in his savior being filled with joy.

So you do have instances of infant salvation. Now these aren't talking about first of all, this is talking about those who go on to live a full life.

So this is not a special casing of those who have not had a sufficient chance.

And so God gives them a free pass. Secondly, this is not a case where people are being saved apart from faith, apart from the justification that comes by faith.

And so what you don't have here is the breaking down of salvation and the steps of salvation that the

Bible describes that so many people do, because what a lot of people imagine is that, okay, all infants dying in infancy are saved and they're just, they're just saved without faith, without justification.

Maybe, you know, you have some post -mortem justification, some post -mortem faith, but they don't have what the, what the

Bible describes, which is someone believing and being justified here on this earth prior to, prior to going and being with the

Lord. And that is what you need to be in the presence of the Lord. You need to be right with him for that. So what you're articulating is essentially that some sort of elect non -elect infant kind of position over and against the standard, which,

I mean, it appears to me to be an Armenian kind of position, which is based on some notion of age of accountability. So maybe you could distinguish between, you know, how that elect non -infant, elect non -elect kind of infant position would be distinct from just standard fair.

Right. So in this position, God is free to choose some for salvation, even those who don't have the normal means by which they hear, you know, it's, it should, we really should recognize here what

Romans 10 says, everyone who calls them the name of the Lord will be saved. How can they call on him whom they've not believed?

How are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard, et cetera. So one needs to actually have the gospel in order to believe it and proclaim it.

What the standard fair is, is that you don't actually need the gospel. You know, you're, you're given a free pass cause you haven't actually had opportunities to sin.

And so essentially it's either a denial of original sin or something else. And we can talk about original sin in a minute or maybe, maybe now if you'd like to transition to that.

Yeah. Well, I mean, I think maybe, maybe you can articulate what you, what you see to be wrong with just your standard view on this topic and, you know, what, why you have a difficult time believing it.

Right. So the, the standard view, Spell out the standard view, what's your argument with it? Right.

So I guess outside the reform camp, the standard view is just that you are not, you are not guilty before God until you've done something wrong.

And that's essentially Pelagianism, right? There is Augustine and Pelagius, and they argued about original sin and Pelagius's argument was pretty much that no one was guilty before God until they had done some actual sin in their life.

You know, there was no, there was no guilt in Adam. There's no original corruption that also counts them guilty.

And so it's not until they actually do something that it would be right. No act of the will. Right. Right. Yeah, exactly.

And so that's, that's one, that's the standard fair outside the non -reform camp or in the non -reform camp and the reform camp, the standard fair is, well, it all happens within the guise of a guise.

And this is probably not the right word. It all happens within the rubric or framework of election. And so God has just in his sovereignty chosen that anyone dying in infancy is one of his elect.

In fact, that is one of his means of election. You know, some people, the means of election is they hear the preaching of the word and repent for others.

It's that they die in infancy and that's the means by which he's elected them. And so he's sovereign and can do that. However, scripture says much to the contrary about how his election works.

So I don't see place for a faithless salvation. I don't see in place for for an election that goes contrary to many things.

Scripture teaches about election, which include his impartiality. It includes, it includes unconditional on the, on the person and their state.

Maybe we could start out with the Arminian position, then like in terms of start by critiquing that.

So like the standard Arminian view essentially is that a person doesn't become a sinner until they have a volitional act of sin.

And then there's some kind of notion of age of accountability imported into that as well. So maybe maybe we'll start just critiquing that and then we'll move on to the

Calvinist position, which at times, I mean, you know, most Calvinists kind of sound like Arminians on this one too.

It's true. Okay. It's true. I mean, they don't sound very Calvinistic when like they're, they're making the same kind of arguments. So we'll get to that next, but then start with just the

Arminian. So there's, there's a two components you mentioned. One is essentially you don't become a sinner until you volitionally commit your first sin.

So that's a denial of original guilt. But then there's also that whole notion of age of accountability that's assumed in there that there's some sort of age of accountability that is only known to God, where at some point

God will determine, you know, who knows when it is, right? Right. Three, four, five, six, you know, you know, for apparently for me to victims, it doesn't happen until they're like 30 or 40.

But you know, it just, it's confusing. It's confusing. But what do you think about age of accountability when does what's wrong with the

Arminian view? Yeah. So there's, there's three ways that we're accounting guilty before God.

The first is original sin. The second is original corruption and the third is actual sin. And so I can break each of those down.

And I believe even that last one, actual sin even that last one comes very early on.

So let's just talk about original sin. And we were, we are just breaking this down as like the

Calvinists in Arminian position. I don't, I'm not a expert on Arminius, but I think this is even far farther than Arminius.

This is more Pelagian. This is more Pelagian. People don't realize how far they've fallen in their biblical literacy and theological thinking.

And so this just to call it Arminian is to fail to recognize just how, how backwards it is from even the debates they were having during that time.

It's more of a Pelagian view that we've, that has now become standard Arminianism in America or something.

Yeah. So yeah, original sin. Okay. So let's, let's go through just a few verses here. Psalm 51 five says, behold,

I was brought forth in iniquity and in sin did my mother conceive me. Romans 5 12 says, therefore just as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin.

And so death spread to all men because all sinned. This is, this is a description of because Adam sinned, all sinned.

And it's not because Adam sinned, we were born with the sin nature and then we sinned because, because Adam sinned.

That means that all sinned, we all sinned in him. And this is said directly in the context of the righteousness, which comes by Jesus.

Did we commit his acts of righteousness? Did he give us a righteous nature whereby, you know, we live righteous lives that then make us right before God?

Well, certainly God sanctifies us, but that's not how justification works.

His righteousness is imputed. It is credited entirely to us in the new covenant.

And so what you see in the garden of Eden is when Adam sins, his sin is credited to all his posterity by, by a natural procreation.

And that, that phrase is designed to exclude Jesus Christ who by the virgin birth is, is excluded from it.

So how does that relate with, so basically you're saying, you know, and I think it's right.

I mean, the Bible teaches there's three forms of guilt. There is, you know, original guilt, there's original corruption, and then there's actual sin as far as that goes.

But then how would you respond to the age of accountability argument? So they're making sure, well, maybe, well, that was just original sin.

Maybe I should go through the others. That was just the original guilt. So Adam's, so Adam's guilt is credited to us. And it's amazing how many people who consider themselves fairly reformed don't even, don't even believe that they usually think, oh, it's just because of the corruption, just because of the sin nature.

You know, I, I'm not even sure how old the term sin nature is. I think that's more of a modern phrase, but yeah, they usually think it's just by that, that they're counted guilty.

And that was a, that's also known as Plossianism or immediate imputation of guilt.

It's yeah, that's something that came later after the reformation when people started suggesting such things anyway.

Okay. So original corruption. So on top of, on top of having Adam's guilt credited to us by means of covenant, the same way that that Christ righteousness is credited to us.

I keep saying that because you know, if you find that if you find that offensive, that Adam's guilt would be credited to us,

Adam's sin would be credited to us. We should also find it as offensive that Christ righteousness would be credited to us. But as first Corinthians 15, 22 says, for as an

Adam, I'll die. So in Christ all shall be made alive. Okay. So original corruption, we are, we are born as Psalm 51, five says in sin.

And so we go astray from birth and this corruption, even if we have not acted on that corruption, even if we have not committed some actual transgression, that corruption itself is not something that can go into the presence of God.

It is something unholy, something evil. And so that is not a, so that makes us guilty in the court of God as well.

And then, and then there's actual sin. So that's the third kind of way that we are guilty before God is actual sin.

This is, this is where someone is committing sin for themselves. Now, when does someone commit actual sin?

This is where we get to your question of the age of accountability. At what point is someone accountable for their actions and is actually committing sin?

Is it, you know, at 12 years old, for some reason I was, I grew up thinking that I don't remember when

I was taught it, but someone had taught it to me that at 12 years old, that was the, that was the point. Well, it's because the

Jewish bar mitzvah is at 13, but I don't know how you got 12. Maybe you just subtracted a number.

I have, yeah, I have no idea. Well, at 13, you become a son of the Torah, essentially in Jewish tradition.

And you know, at that point, you're accountable to the law. So that's maybe where you're coming from.

Right? Yeah. But scripture teaches, scripture teaches everyone's accountable for the law. We may suppress the truth and unrighteousness, but Romans two says the law is written on our heart.

It's not written on the heart. Once we're a certain age, it's written on our heart in the beginning. And when, when is actual sin committed?

So, yeah, let me go through. Matthew, Matthew 22, 36,

Jesus asked, what is the greatest commandment? Jesus says, you shall love the Lord, your

God, with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind. Now, at what point does anyone do that to the smallest degree?

What point does a child do that? They're breaking that commandment every time they have a conscious thought. Every time someone has a conscious action, they are committing sin.

Romans 14, 23 says that anything that does not proceed from faith is sin. You just saw

Psalm 22, which prophetically speaks of Christ and the trust that he has from the womb. The reason why no sin is counted to Christ in his infancy is because he is trusting in God, even from the womb.

Right? And we are not doing that. We are, we are not trusting in God from the womb. We are faithless. And as it says in the

Psalms, we go astray from birth speaking lies. Well, and I'm really glad you mentioned that because it seems like there are a lot of people, including

Christians who, well, I mean, there are a lot of Christians who basically look at children as if they're blameless.

Right. You know, even up to little angels, they're little angels. Right. And, and I just, you know,

I think anyone who understands the Bible and is honest and also has children of their own can understand that they're anything but blameless.

I mean, you know, I, I just had a, um, my, my second daughter born a few weeks ago and, and all she does is think about herself.

You know, she, she doesn't think about, I mean, she probably doesn't even, even really think about, you know, me and her mom that much.

She thinks about herself. Right. And she's definitely, and if she's only thinking about herself, she's definitely not, you know, honoring

God with her thoughts, even as a newborn. And so you look at, so I've, I look at those types of situations and I, I, I have to say to myself, there's no, there's no way that, that, you know, children don't sin.

I mean, immediately. Right. Right. And that's basically what you're saying. Right. Yeah.

Even, even from the womb, uh, and by from the womb, I mean in the womb, if there are conscious thoughts that are had in the womb, and I'm no,

I'm no, uh, uh, happens. Well, yeah, I don't know at what point cognition, we need to know what, what gestation stage they start having those, those sinful thoughts of theirs.

Yeah. I mean, people don't want to think of giggles and coups as being sinful, but if they are not done with faith,

Romans 14, 23 says that they are. Yeah. Augustine. Yeah. And his book confessions, it's really interesting that he has a chapter devoted to confessing the sins of his infancy.

And, um, you know, he got that because he observed that, you know, the angry baby who was breastfeeding at his mother's womb, you know, angry because they're not getting the milk in time.

But I mean, when you, we just did an episode on this is that, um, we were talking about, um, should

I repent of my emotions? But as you read through the Bible, one of the things you're going to find is sin is not just a volitional act.

It's not just about your thoughts. It's like, you're, you're told to rejoice with those who rejoice, who weep with those who weep.

Sin is much more comprehensive than what we realized. We're told to love the Lord our God with all of our heart and soul, mind and strength.

And it's much, much more than just volitional actions. And these things happen very early, but, but what do you think about the idea that God would just overlook certain sins if they happen below, like the age of accountability, whenever that is.

And so like the idea of, you know, the Jewish idea of the age of accountability essentially is the idea that when you become 13, you become a son of a

Torah, meaning you legally become accountable to the law. And we have some kind of mirror to that in our legal system today in that, you know, you have to, like, if you're below the age of 18, that doesn't mean you can't sin, but you're not going to be charged with a crime if it happens below a certain age.

And so does God, you know, have some sort of legal system that mirrors that aspect of human legal systems?

Does he like refuse to impute the guilt of our sin on us until we reach a

Because that seems to be the back door that some people are using. Right. Yeah. That makes a lot of sense in human courts.

You can't punish every sin. You can't see every sin. That's only for God to do. Vengeance is his.

But in a divine court, he is perfect. He does not clear the innocent or excuse me. He does not clear the guilty, right.

Without some kind of payment. And that's, that's what we have Jesus Christ for. But you asked the question, you know, does he just not impute that sin if they don't know?

One, one strategy, a lot of people take is they look at Romans five 13 through 14 says for sin.

Indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted or there is no law. And so they apply this to the children.

They say, look, children don't have the law. They don't know. And so God wouldn't God wouldn't count their sins towards them.

Even if they are sinning, he doesn't count their sins towards them. Well, there are several things to say about that.

The first is that this is specific specifically talking about before the law of Moses. And so what do you say about all those adults that lived before the law of Moses?

Is there sin not imputed to them? Is it not? Well, that's what's weird about it. What's weird about that kind of form of argument is that you basically have to say that anyone who has not had access to the gospel or the law and history are okay.

So, I mean, basically everyone in the flood of Noah are all okay because they haven't been given a chance.

And I mean, these feel more like universalist arguments at this point, right? Yeah. And let's say you say, okay, well, you know, a child sort of begins to understand

God's law by observing the world and things. So eventually they understand. But if that's, if that's the case, if God does not impute sin where there is no law and that they don't have the law until a certain age, why do they die?

Why do infants die? What they have to be guilty if God would take them from this earth, right?

There wouldn't be death if there were no sin, if there were no guilt. It's not just a unfortunate consequence.

It is indeed evidence that there is sin in this person.

That and sunburns. That and what? Sunburns, yes. Sunburns. Sunburns, yeah.

Yeah. And then of course you have earlier in Romans a statement that even those who, even those who do the law without having the law show that they are law unto themselves, they have the law written on their heart.

So we have, we have sufficient evidence that everyone has the law of God and they have it as by virtue of their creation, not by virtue of observation or deduction by virtue of their creation.

So we, I think we've kind of established that, you know, with a lot of these arguments that try to, you know, prove that God is not sending, you know, babies to hell, basically.

It seems like you basically have to at least momentarily become an

Arminian or you have to become, or even worse, you know, universalistic in your theology.

So why, why do you think it is that people, even, I mean, even Reformed Christians are willing to concede in certain theological areas that normally you would never dare think of conceding just for this one topic.

Why do you think that is? Right. First of all, because everybody else is doing it. I mean, that's just what you see in a lot of things.

You know, if, if this is the standard way to go, it's very easy to say what everybody else is saying.

It's very hard to say the opposite, especially when it doesn't sound loving and that's, that's the real kicker here is it doesn't sound loving.

I mean, you start off with this, this interview with the, why do you hate babies? Because it sounds like, it sounds like someone who says this doesn't, does hate babies, right?

Truth is, truth has got to be important to us. It can't just be what we think will comfort people, what has pastoral utility or anything like that.

It has to be what is true. Well, I've heard people, Conley, I've heard people say that, and that's what, that's what's been always so disturbing to me is that I've heard people say, if you can't stand, like big name pastors say, if you can't comfort a grieving mother, who's just had a miscarriage with the knowledge that their baby will be in heaven, then you need to get out of the ministry.

And so. That's awful. If you can't, what if, can you comfort a grieving daughter about her unbelieving grandmother?

You know, you can, you can apply this in all kinds of ways. You know, a little old ladies that die that you think of as sweet and innocent, that doesn't make them sweet and innocent.

Everyone is guilty before God unless they have the righteousness of Jesus Christ. And that's the thing, you know, comparing this to universalism and asking the question, you know, is this truth a good truth?

That's really like a good question here. Is this truth a good truth? All of God's truth is good truth. And so why is it that we say it's a good truth that not everyone is saved?

You know, not universalism is true, but instead only some people are saved. Well, the reason is it shows both the, the mercy and the justice of God and that both are glorified.

And the same is true with the way he saves infants. If it were the case that every single infant dying in infancy were saved, then there would not be the same kind of praise of God's mercy towards us.

Now, maybe at this point, we don't feel it, but on that last day, when we see the hordes of those who did not make it, not because of the difference between them and us, right?

In our natural state, but rather the difference in God's mercy towards his particular people, the far more we will praise him for it.

You know, if there's something that illustrates that, oh, well, you know, there was this kind of this innocence and et cetera, there's not the same praise.

You don't have the same kind of, same kind of redemption. You don't have the same thing to glorify him over. And his wisdom is vastly greater than our wisdom.

And we should not take him down to our level and demand that he loves the way we love and that he has wisdom the way we have wisdom, that his ways are our ways.

We should not do that. Yeah. Well, I think, you know, as I'm thinking through this topic in general and I'm trying to, you know, wrestle with it,

I think one of the things that's very hard to do is it's very hard to try to come up with a, you know, a positive case for this.

I mean, it feels very much like the kind of arguments that I need. I either need to go a

Pelagian route and, and basically just deny the doctrine of original guilt.

That seems to be one option. That's, that seems to be bad to me. I don't want to be Pelagian. Don't never go full

Pelagian. Right. So stay away from there. You know, but then there also seems to be a lot of universalistic kind of arguments that are being put forward with this topic.

Meaning like it really feels like a lot of the outrage is, is more about hell in general, like the reality of hell.

And it forces me to sound, say things that, I mean, almost as if like God would be unjust for like, if I can't comfort a mother who is grieving over the loss of her, her miscarriage with the knowledge that that baby will definitely be in here in heaven,

I need to stay out of the ministry. That just feels like I have to go like a universalistic route to make that case.

It's like, well, I thought we were people who believed in hell. I don't know why, why have we not made our peace with this as a reality in general?

And so part of it, so you have the Pelagian kind of impulse. You have the universalist kind of arguments that are being put forward.

A lot of it feels very emotional, right? Most of what's being put forward is not like a scriptural case in any way, but it feels like a very emotional case.

But, you know, as you're, as you're thinking about some of these things, what would be, are there any arguments for infant, like universal infant salvation that you feel like are better than others?

Are there any that you feel like have any kind of merit whatsoever? Man, I've had so many thoughts since you've been talking.

There's a lot of things to go to, but yeah, I, the one that causes me the most pause and I don't,

I don't think it's really a great argument, but the one that causes me the most pause is the one people go to. And in second

Samuel or second Samuel 12, 23, David is mourning for his, for his dying son.

And then a son dies and he says, but now he is dead. Why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he will not return to me.

Now that's, I think that's one of the better arguments, but it's really not a very good argument because he never says that his child's in heaven.

All he's describing is that his son has gone to the grave and that, and that he will, all he can do is also go to the grave.

Now a lot of people have fired back and said, Oh no, it can't possibly be talking about just going to the grave.

Just look at similar language throughout scripture. You've got a lot of, you've got, you know, other statements about this that don't seem to say anything otherwise.

You know, one I like looking at is John 11 where Lazarus has died and Jesus is saying, let's go to him.

And how do the disciples interpret it? They interpret it as that. They think that Jesus is going to go die and they want to go die with him.

And it's just a statement about death, you know, but let us go to him. So Thomas called the twins said to his fellow disciples, let us also go that we may die with him.

You know, there's no, there's no statement that this is, you know, some eternal hope or anything like that.

It's just, let us go to the grave as well. You know, another, another example that I actually,

I actually read a book by John MacArthur on this topic earlier this year. I wish I could remember what, what the name of it was.

Yeah. Yeah. It's that one. It is that one. And in the book, MacArthur bring brings up you know, in Jonah four,

God tells Jonah there's 120 ,000 souls who don't know they're right.

They're right from their left. Right. And, and so John MacArthur in his book, he, he views that as a argument in favor of the idea that children go to heaven and that God has a special kind of mercy on children because in that verse, he believes

God is, is specifically talking about children and people whose mental capacity is, you know, that of a child.

Right. So John MacArthur is extending it even into like the mentally handicapped who, who might be adults, but can only reason as a child.

And so I, I read through the whole book and personally,

I didn't find myself. I was hoping I would be convinced that he,

I was hoping that MacArthur would convince me that I was wrong on my position and that he was right.

But I, I ultimately didn't find that argument very compelling. But what are, what are your thoughts on Jonah four?

Yeah. Observing that children don't know the right hand from the left. That's not, I don't know what the surprise is there.

What does this have to do with with moral accountability? Now there are, there are some passages that talk about them, not knowing a good or evil.

Right. And so I think there's like a little more weight to that. Deuteronomy 125. I think it's

Deuteronomy 125. I've got, I've got 139 up and then Isaiah 716 also says something similar.

Yeah. And so, and in Isaiah eight, the same prophecy is given, but with a different colloquialism before he says my mother, my father.

So, you know, it's just, it's just a colloquialism to talk about an early age. And so what, what is knowing good and evil?

That's a, that's a motif through scripture that means something significant. And it's not having any kind of moral accountability or, or something like that.

In fact, you even see in Hebrews 514, that the author of Hebrews uses this phrase to describe

Christians who, who can't discern good and evil, right.

Good and evil come together a lot of times. So, you know, if, if he could say a Christian is having trouble discerning good and evil, are they not held accountable?

You know, rather it's a statement about authoritative judgment, being able to give judgments without resting on another to, to let them to decide.

For example, that's why you have the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. You know, did Adam not know good before he ate of the tree?

Of course he knew good. He knew what God was. Did he not know what evil was? Of course he knew that it was wrong to break

God's law when God told him not to eat. Actually, it wouldn't have been wrong for him to eat of the tree if he didn't realize that that was wrong.

So the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is not knowing what right and wrong is at all.

It is rather, it rather represents Adam taking authoritative judgment into his own hands, being autonomous rather than trusting in the

Lord. And that's why you see the phrase good and evil used later on to describe David's great wisdom and Solomon's great wisdom, because they are able to make authoritative judgments as Kings.

And so the phrase good and evil describing a point in a person's development where they're making judgments on their own, not just trusting others is not talking about all lack of moral accountability.

What's amazing about that is, I mean, I remember being a very young kid and, you know, way before 12, you know, your arbitrary age of 12,

I remember being a very young kid. And I mean, you know the difference between right and wrong.

You know, when you're doing something wrong, you have all the guilt and the shame and the condemnation that comes from all of that. It's not like as if it just magically turns on, you know, when you turn 18.

And I mean, I think this has a lot of relevance to a lot of other topics as well, where people pretend as if children just simply have no moral agency whatsoever, you know, up to a very late age, even.

And that's a little bit disturbing to think about with some of those things. But what do you think are the practical ramifications to this kind of doctrine?

So why is it important we get it right? Yeah, it's important that we get it right so that we appreciate our salvation rightly.

You know, just back to that question. Is this truth a good truth? Yes, it is. The more we realize just how merciful

God is to us and that this mercy is something very precious. You said, is this truth a good truth?

What is the truth? Sorry. The truth is that not all infants dying in infancy are saved.

Right. So keep on going. Yeah. Is this a good truth? Absolutely. All of God's truth is good.

By this, we might greater appreciate the fact that we are saved. You know, are we owed some kind of chance, for example?

A lot of people think that we are, right? And you see C .S. Lewis and others build theologies out of this where, you know, if someone's on an island and they ever hear about God.

And so a lot of times it allows us to import the idea, even if we believe salvation is by grace through faith, you know,

God's doing. Even all the same, we feel like, okay, we were owed a chance, and then it's up to us whether or not we handled that chance rightly.

And secondly, you know, if we think of salvation as something that's happening to all deceased infants, and it's not as precious a thing.

You know, just one stat here. According to the National Institute of Health, 15 to 20 % of all known pregnancies result in miscarriage.

As many as 15 % of conceptions result in spontaneous abortion. So that's like a really staggering thing.

Why do we grieve over those? Yeah, exactly. That's a great question. Why do we grieve? Why do we grieve over abortion, et cetera?

Aren't these more certain means of election than preaching the word? It's funny you mention that because I specifically remember in one of my classes when

I was in Bible college, we did talk about this one time. We asked the question, hey, what happens to babies when they die?

And really only me and one other student who was a peer of mine, we were pretty much the only ones who said that, hey, babies are held to the same judgment that every other human being is held to.

And one of the sort of tertiary arguments in favor of that beyond just the scriptural stuff is just, hey, okay, so if we're wrong, if babies actually just all go to heaven, then the reality is the people in abortion clinics who are carrying out baby murder have sent more people to heaven than any pastor ever has.

So what do you do with that? I mean, that kind of almost seems like, well, man, that kind of doesn't make me want to fight against abortion as much.

Let's give the other side its due then, and Conley put you on the spot. All right, if that's not true, so if abortionists are not doing the

Lord's work, then if the Bible says if you confess with your mouth, Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart that God is risen from the dead, you'll be saved, would the case that you're making essentially be arguing that the abortionists are sending every baby to hell without them having a chance to repent of their sins because they don't have the vocal cords yet?

So how would you defend against that? Well, yeah, it's not about vocal cords. It's about trusting the

Lord. Scripture speaks of a vocal proclamation because that's usually how this comes about. That's normative.

And I've already acknowledged it's also normative that hearing is outward, but you have the case of John the

Baptist. You have what's described in Psalm 22. I'm not saying that it has to be the normative way every time.

However, it does need to happen. There needs to be faith in order for there to be justification or for someone to be right with God because it's through faith that God is glorified.

It doesn't have to be a big faith. Right. What kind of faith is it? Go ahead and explain that. Yeah, so—

What does that look like? What does baby faith look like or infant and mother's womb faith?

Yeah, in the example you have in Luke 1, you have—this is extraordinary, right?

This is not something that I believe happens often. You have John the Baptist leaping with joy in his mother's womb.

He is aware that he's in the presence of his Savior. That's about all I know. His trust is in the

Lord Jesus. Now, what he knows about Jesus is not well -developed. I mean even later—

He couldn't pass the doctrinal test. Yeah. Even later, he's a little confused, and he's like, are you the one to come or should we wait for another?

Right? That's as an adult. And you have all throughout the

Old Testament people trusting in the Messiah, not knowing who he is, people naming their own children

Noah because this will be the one to give us rest, right? They don't really know who the Messiah is, but they're trusting in this coming

Savior. And so even these small forms of faith are sufficient.

However, faith is important because what distinguishes faith from works— let me say it this way.

What distinguishes faith from works is not because with faith you aren't doing something and with works you are, and so God wants us to be saved in a way where we're not doing something because faith still involves some kind of activity of the brain or at least activity of the soul where you are believing in this

Messiah. So if what distinguishes the two is not that one you're doing something and one you're not, then it's not sufficiently glorifying to God that one be saved, you know, just not doing anything like an infant dying in infancy, right?

Rather, the reason why faith in particular glorifies God is because its essence is to recognize that your salvation is not of works.

Its essence is to recognize that God is being incredibly merciful. And so God has chosen to save through faith.

This was his choice in order that he might be glorified. And so what we're describing when we're describing alternative ways of salvation is something that is less glorifying to God.

Now, you had— Meaning if you just had a plan of salvation that involved choosing people below a certain age to save, not on the basis of faith, just on the basis of grace extended to an arbitrary age limit, that would be less glorifying essentially?

Right, exactly. Yeah, you wouldn't have the same kind of appreciation of redemption.

And, you know, there's a couple things that came up. So I mentioned those statistics from the National Institute of Health.

One of the things I was getting at there is that salvation is precious. It's something that comes to the few. People ask

Jesus, Lord, are only few going to be saved? And he confirms this. Make every effort to enter through the narrow door.

But if half of conceptions, up to half of conceptions, are resulting in spontaneous abortions is the technical term, if that's the case and all these babies are going to heaven, it's not actually a narrow door.

It's actually a pretty wide one. A lot of people are making it because these are people too. So salvation becomes far less precious on that last day when we're glorifying

God. It's not people witnessing his mercy the way the Bible describes witnessing his mercy, which is something very precious, something very reserved for only

God's special people that he has chosen for himself. And you just don't have the same kind of appreciation.

And, you know, just to add a couple other things about, I think, the way people psychologically think about this.

In Luke 20, Jesus talks to the Sadducees. And he tells them about the resurrection, that they don't know the scriptures or the power of God, and that they don't realize that there's no one married or given a marriage in heaven.

And that's a lot of times what's going on in our thoughts. Like we're thinking about our familial relationships. We're taking these earthly pictures and projecting them onto heaven, thinking that things will be like they are there.

And we're not, we don't know the scriptures or the power of God to use the travesties that happen here and use them for good.

We don't know, for example, the very end of Isaiah, the passage that Jesus quotes to speak of hell, where he talks about the worm not dying and the fire not being quenched, where he talks about people gathering every

Sabbath to come and worship before him and to gaze at the bodies of the damned, essentially.

This is something that, it's pretty horrific, but Isaiah, the very end of Isaiah, speaks of this as, speaks of us witnessing what

God has done, not only in his mercy, but also in his justice as a way that we appreciate his mercy.

Just like Roman Stein says, you know, why is God, why is it that God is just in doing this?

Why is this being, you know, electing some for mercy and some for judgment? Well, it is to greater reveal his mercy to his vessels of mercy.

That's the answer. And we don't, we don't seem to understand that. Yeah. Well, so you have the, you have the

Armenian, our Pelagian kind of view, which has some sort of age of accountability that works out in that way.

Then you have more of an elect infant view, and I guess you can divide that up into different categories. So you have all infants being elect.

That's something you mentioned. Like every single infant is elect by, you know, some arbitrary choice that isn't really spelled out in the

Bible, but we'll just go with it for a second. So you have that view. Then you have the view essentially to say, you know, some infants are elect, some are not.

It's based on God's sovereign choice. And then you have a reformed wrinkle on this, where you have the infants of believers are elect on the basis of children being holy.

So where do you, you know, of those three positions, you've already said you don't believe all infants are elect, but you know, you have all infants are elect.

It's just up to God's good pleasure. Ephesians one kind of thing, right? But then you're saying exceedingly rare.

So probably not a whole lot of John the Baptist kind of scenarios, but you can imagine some, but then you have the reformed children of believer are holy due to the presence of one believer in the family kind of thing, meaning all believers children are elect by virtue of, and then you could even move that into more of a federal vision kind of way, but we don't want to go there.

Well, yeah, by covenant status. I mean, that's what a lot of people would say. So yeah, go with those three.

Yeah. I'm, I call myself reforms, but I'm reformed Baptist. So some people would think that that's not reformed, but yeah, so I don't believe.

Not truly reformed, not truly reformed. I don't believe. You were the ones that would burn. What's that?

You were the ones that would have gotten burned in the reformation. Exactly. Reformed. Yeah. I would have been given my third baptism.

So yeah, I don't, I don't believe that, that the way the new covenant operates is inclusive of the children of believers.

So I don't believe there's any special status for, for the children of believers. Is that just you being Baptist? That's like a whole different discussion of is, you know, is

Presbyterian covenant theology accurate or something? I mean, is that, is that basically the Presbyterian position in general or is that,

I mean, I guess that just you're a Baptist. So that's, that's where you can't go there.

Yeah. Well, the latter is probably more accurate, but in looking back and trying to look back and discern, for example, like what was

Calvin's position? I mean, it's clear by the time you get to B .B. Warfield, you know, Presbyterians have been assuming that that all universal election have children.

Yeah. Universal. And then, but even before that, looking at some of the Westminster divines,

I have that impression too. If I understand the quotes correctly, that they also are not, not a universal, sorry, but that the children of believers are automatically saved.

And with Calvin, I have some suggestions of that, but not as much. So I don't, I don't know how far back it goes to, you know, everyone who would roughly identify with that stream of theology.

So, but you basically outline your position. Your position is, it's just pure up to God's good pleasure.

There's nothing special. I don't believe there's anything special about the children of, of believers when it comes to this particular point.

Well, how rare do you think it is? That's a, that's a good question. I, I think it's very rare.

Do you think it was only, only like John the Baptist and David Jesus or something like that?

If I show up in heaven and I find that out, I would not be surprised. Because that was going to be my question is, you know, it, it seems like there's, you can make a pretty strong argument that that is only for them because because outside of that, it really does seem like I'm, I'm not sure.

I mean, I mean, I understand like God is the one who's granting faith to begin with. Right. And so he can grant faith to whoever he wants, but it seems hard to fathom how, how a baby can have faith in a, in a saving way.

So. Yeah. I wanted to push on you with that too, Conley, with what Harrison is saying in that like, how confident are you in the fact that John the

Baptist was elect from his mother's womb as a position in general? Let me spell out the, the argument against it.

So to say that he's filled with his mother's, fills the spirit from his mother's womb, you know, often, you know, as you read through the old covenant in particular, one of the things you find is that the filling of the spirit isn't necessarily synonymous with salvation.

It can be, you know, filling with the spirit in terms of empowered for service or something along those lines.

And that may be what David is saying when he's saying, do not remove from me your Holy Spirit in the same way that you did to Saul, like not in that he was saved, but that he was empowered for ministry.

So if you make that kind of assumption, then you say, well, Hey, you know, John the Baptist was elect from before the foundation of world, just like Jacob was elect before the foundation of world.

But then that election is like, there's that election that presupposes certain things that happen in time where they're actually saved in time.

And so then how wed to... It's called personal justification. Personal justification is the moment when someone is born again.

Right. So then, you know, would you necessarily have, I mean, is the case for the, the, um, salvation of John the

Baptist in infancy overwhelming, you know, or do you feel like that's... I believe it is.

Yes. And a lot of people make the same argument that you just made based on that, the verse

I read from Luke 1 15. However, it's not just Luke 1 15 saying that he'll be filled with the spirit from his mother's womb.

It's what I find so convincing is not that verse, but the confirmation of it later on in the chapter.

And I'll just go ahead and read Luke 1 41 says, and when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the baby leaped in her womb and Elizabeth was filled with the

Holy Spirit. Okay. So Elizabeth now filled with the Holy Spirit, and she's going to give Holy Spirit inspired words.

She says, she exclaimed with a loud cry, blessed are you among women and blessed is the fruit of your womb.

And why is this granted to me? The mother of my, the mother of my Lord should come to me for behold, when the sound of your greeting came to my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy.

Okay. So Holy Spirit inspired words that are saying that the baby was filled with joy.

Why, why does the baby have joy in the presence of a savior? It's because he recognizes where he is.

There's something happening here and we have every reason to believe that it's what was described in verse 15 and being filled with the spirit.

So him having joy in the presence of a savior, I find a very compelling. Also just a side note.

This is a really great passage when talking about abortion to other Christians and what, you know, at what point do you consider someone a person here you have

Jesus very early on and, and his gestation, like I said, being regarded as a person by another very latent gestation.

Harrison, do you had something you wanted to add to that? I forgot.

I hijacked you. I hijacked you. Okay. It's okay. It's okay. If I, if I think of it, I'll, I'll hijack you and then we'll be even.

Yeah, that's fine. An eye for an eye. All right. So you, yeah.

So basically in that case, you're pretty convinced that that would be, so you view the feeling of the spirit in a theological sense, you view joy in a very theological sense and not just in a phenomenological sense or something along those lines or a functional sense.

And that's fair enough. But so, but then beyond that, you believe it could happen.

You know, it could happen. It probably, we wouldn't have any way of knowing really whether or not it does.

Right. Right. No, we wouldn't. In the absence of some sort of special revelation or something along those lines, like the only instances we could actually confirm that would be legitimate and place like a scriptural hope would then be, we'd have to have some sort of special revelation to confirm it.

Would that be fair? Yes. Yeah. Because even if you have a child who seems to be born again from a very early age, at what point can they really even demonstrate that?

Right. All right. So what, what do you think of the, like, what's the benefit? Like, so keep on elaborating.

You elaborated on some benefit. What is the benefit of getting this right? Or what's the danger of getting it wrong? And what's the benefit of getting it right?

Like why is it important to discuss other than you just hate babies? Like, like why, like, like why, why is this something to, we we're having a discussion about in your mind?

Yeah. If you, if you get this wrong, you are not going to appreciate your own salvation the way that you want.

You aren't going to know people are inconsistent with themselves on this, but they aren't going to care about infants the way they ought.

We just talked about, you know, the importance of, of thinking about abortion rightly, you know, for example, that it is something that is spiritually harmful to children, not just, you know, giving them a free pass into heaven.

We're going to be more consistent with ourselves because this is often a point of mockery for unbelievers.

You've seen debates where they're where people are pointing out that, you know,

Christians are, are just, you know, bending the rules right here just to, just to make this more palatable.

You know, I think it's important to not try to be palatable, but to be consistent and truthful.

And yeah, the primary thing that I believe though, is that this is, this is important for us appreciating our own salvation in the same way that we know that the fact that universalism isn't true is, and that's a good truth.

In the same way, we should recognize that the universal salvation of those dying in infancy is not true and that that's a good truth.

If you believe that everyone was saved, you would not appreciate your own salvation the way that you do.

The same is true and a different measure with, with the salvation of infants. I mean, isn't there also kind of like a greater sense of urgency that you have as a parent that you can't just, you know,

I know that there's a lot of, you know, a lot of, a lot of parents aren't as urgent as they could be to try to evangelize their kids because they presume upon this window of opportunity that they have related to some sort of age of accountability that, you know, if they die in infancy, then, you know, they're in free zone.

And so they, yeah, it's important to teach your kids. Yeah. It's important to teach your kids the gospel from an early age repeatedly, you know, as you walk by the way, et cetera, you know,

Deuteronomy 6, 7, you've got to, you've got to take those opportunities. You can't just assume, Oh, well, you know,

I'll get to that eventually when they actually need it. No, they need it now. They need it. They need it early. How does that look like with parenting?

Like in general, how does that look like saying, Hey, you're not sold on this, that your kids are going to go.

How has that affected how you've parented and how you've raised your kids? Yeah.

Well, the first, first, it doesn't mean that I, you know, throw cold water in any profession of faith that they make where I say,

Oh no, you don't really believe or something like that. Right. Because I've, I've got some I don't know, pessimistic view of children or something like that.

You're not 12 yet. Can't believe. Yeah, exactly. Wait until age accountability. Yeah, exactly.

We'll baptize you after you're 35 with a decade of walking with the Lord and before that is presumption.

Want to make sure your resume is up to snuff. So it doesn't mean that. Yeah. It means, okay.

So first of all, I really recommend the book Shepherding a Child's Heart. I don't know. You probably have opinions on, on books.

Maybe I shouldn't be recommending them, but yeah. Shepherding a Child's Heart, I think is a great book. And what one of the primary things that it talks about is basically every chance where you're disciplining your child, every, every chance whether you're correcting them is an opportunity to preach the gospel.

Like those have to be taken advantage of. Now I, I'm not perfect at that. You know, I miss the opportunities lots of times, but that's one of the things that looks like it also looks like daily family worship.

I believe that family should be worshiping God together daily and using those opportunities, not just to read the passage, but to explain what that means about the state of their soul.

And not just to explain some spiritual truth, but to try to explain to them it to them in a way where it gets to the heart of the gospel and their need for the gospel.

Conley, I've got two sort of practical questions. I don't know what Tim, I don't know if you have anything else that you want to ask, but I did want to ask these.

Yeah, you go for it. I did want to ask these two questions and then maybe we can, Tim, if you've got anything, we ask that and then we can wrap it up from there.

But the first question I wanted to ask you is, okay. So obviously, you know, most

Christians at this point in time, they probably believe that some, if not most likely all babies go to heaven if they die, right?

When they're confronted with the reality that that's not the case. And in fact, if any go to heaven, it is probably very, very rare, right?

And they value the Bible. They understand that God's ways are higher than our ways.

They understand that they can be mistaken about plenty of things and that God is always right.

Let's say you present all this truth to them. And then they realize, Hey, you know what? I think you're right.

I think I was mistaken. I think, you know, most children, if not all or, or, you know, 99 % or however you want to say it, probably do not go to heaven when they die.

They go to hell instead. I can see, I can see a situation where someone, someone is convinced and then after they're convinced they enter a sort of state of, of just total fear, right?

Fear for their own children probably. And so how would you, how would you counsel someone who is looking at all of this and saying, well,

Hey, I mean now I'm constantly afraid that, you know, my children are going to die before they're ever, before they're ever saved.

How would you counsel that person and comfort them? Yeah. Great question. I think before answering how would

I counsel them? First, I just want to point out that this is, this concern and fear for people is something that we could have with anyone in our life, right?

Given that hell is a reality. So this, this reaction that someone had does not make this, you know, a bad truth or untrue.

So yeah. How do you counsel someone who is, who is concerned about their children? And specifically

I'm talking about like a, like a, a crippling kind of fear.

So not just like a, Oh, Hey, I'm worried. So I'm going to go tell them the gospel. I mean like, Hey, all I can ever think about is what if my baby died?

You know, that, that kind of idea. I just wanted to distinguish between because I think there's a healthy kind of fear like you're saying, but then there's something that I think goes probably even beyond that, you know?

Yeah. Well, you point out the fact that we live in an era where God desires that the gospel be spread far and wide.

The great commission is a real thing. There is a lot of hope that we should approach evangelism, whether it be to your own children, whether it be to the world in a very hopeful and expectant way.

And then particularly that God chooses to use parents to reach children.

You know, the passage that Tim was mentioning a second ago about about children being holy.

You know, I don't think it, I don't think it means that they are automatically saved, but yeah,

God cares for the little ones and God cares for the, for the children of believers.

And so it is often the case that the way that someone comes to believe is through their family and yeah, that there's a lot of hope.

So pointing to the passages where Christ expresses his love for the little ones and then, you know, recognizing that if that's true, then, you know,

I can trust whatever he will do with my little one is good. He was, he was willing to invite them.

You know, he was willing to let them sit on his knee, et cetera. And he is, he is not here on this earth at this moment, but he is not gone entirely.

You know, he is up in heaven reigning over everything so we can trust him. Okay. And then secondly, you meant you kind of alluded to this early earlier.

So I wanted to come back to it and hear a little bit here. You flesh it out a little bit more, but let's say, you know, there's someone in your, let's say, you know, you're a pastor or perhaps a family member of yours experiences a miscarriage, right.

Or their, their child dies, you know, at one or two years old, something like that. How would you comfort them and the death of their child knowing the truth that all babies don't go to heaven?

Yeah. Another, another great question. Other difficult question. Yeah. Pointing once again to passages that talk about the goodness of God, the wisdom of God, because this is, this is really the key in all kinds of difficult trials.

It's not to convince somebody of something that's not true that makes them feel better. Rather, it's to convince them of the things that are true that give them comfort.

And the truth is that God is wise, that he is good, that he is, that he has compassion on his people.

And so we should not yeah, we should not give offer lies to make people feel better.

Now there are, there are some additional things that I think would be appropriate to meditate on, but maybe not appropriate in that particular counseling situation.

Things that I think may help people if they have an opportunity to meditate on these things in a, in a different context.

For example, what I was mentioning about the Sadducees, you know, a lot of times what's happening is that we're taking our false view of heaven that mimics earth and the family relations we have on earth and the marriages we have on earth, et cetera.

And then wants to assume that everything's going to be just like that. And so how can I be happy if for all of eternity, my child is dead, right?

But the, but the fact of the matter is that the relationships that exist the way they do here on earth are not the relationships that, that exist the way they will in heaven.

And so we can't, we can't import these false mindsets. Now, I don't think that's necessarily the right way to counsel someone in that particular moment to say that, you know, you're assuming too much about what your relationship is going to be like in eternity.

But but I do think that's an important thing for people to contemplate because the more you bring that, that mindset that assumes too much you will you'll, you'll leave yourself very prone to these sorts of spiritual attacks.

So basically, you know, there are you, are you basically saying like, Hey, there's yes, we need to be telling people the truth, but then we also probably need to be cognizant that there is a time and place to say certain truths and then a time to say like, let's wait to talk about this and just mourn.

Is that, is that kind of what you're getting at? Yeah, I think it is. And yeah, like, so you wouldn't, you wouldn't necessarily say like,

Hey, you know, you're like, Hey, find comfort in the fact that, and this is like a pretty,

I don't know that. I definitely would not suggest saying this in the middle of someone who's just gone through a miscarriage, but you wouldn't necessarily want to say like,

Hey, you know, take comfort in the fact that God has a plan for everyone. And the plan for, for this baby was to be a, you know, a vessel of wrath, for example, like that, that's a pretty poor way of counseling someone right in the, right in the middle of it.

Is that kind of what you're getting at? Or that you love your baby now, but you won't love them in heaven or something like that.

Kind of what I was saying a second ago, but I would never phrase it that way. Right. It's just that the relationships that we have here on earth are not the same as they will be there in heaven.

And we shouldn't assume that they will be. It seems like if we have a, if there is a category for an elect infant and a non -elect infant, and, you know, apart from some sort of special revelation, we honestly have no way of knowing who's who then in some sense, it doesn't seem logical that we would just content ourself to say,

I don't, I don't know if this baby was elect or not elect and like speculating about probabilities at this point isn't even helpful.

Like the only thing that's helpful is we cast ourself on the mercy of God and just let God be God and trust in his justice and trust in his holiness.

And, you know, and then the baby question really, isn't any different than any other question, you know, related to the salvation of anyone in general,

God's God, he's just, and we have to make our peace with the fact that people we love and care about right now, there'll be surprises one way or the other.

And, you know, like there could be good surprises. There could be bad surprises. Like we just, we, we should be very careful pronouncing anything with absolute confidence.

You know, one way or the other, we can just say, Hey, based on the evidence, I doubt it, you know, in this case, you know, or something along those lines, without just retreating to some pure agnosticism across the board, would an agnosticism related to babies be somewhat of a safer bet?

Then what do you think about that? Yeah, I'm fine with, I'm fine with allowing people to recognize that scripture does have a category for elect infants dying in infancy.

And so if that's the case, you know, once again, you, you cast yourself on the mercy of God, you say that the

Lord gives, you don't hope in the ignorance though, right? What do you mean by that? Well, there's a difference between like saying like,

God, if there is this category, God can do whatever he wants. I'm hoping my child is saved. Yeah, you can presume, you can, you can go two different directions.

You can presume that they're not, or you can presume that they are.

And, or you can say like, you can like adopt a principled agnosticism.

There's no way to know. So it's unhelpful to speculate. So of those three options, what would you take? For the elective, for the infant, for the infant.

Right. If they, if they hold you to the wall and say, tell me. I wouldn't,

I wouldn't get into that conversation with them, but if they hold you to the wall and tell me, are you going to presume?

No. Are you going to presume? Yes. So you're going to retreat to principled agnosticism. I guess the principled agnosticism would be the best route and, and tell people to, you know, be willing to say, though he slay me,

I will trust in him. You know, we've, we've got to trust the goodness of God, even when it doesn't feel right to us.

Sure. So you wouldn't accept the, you wouldn't accept the demand to, you wouldn't preach him into heaven at the funeral?

Right. Right. Yeah. If that's what they're, if they think that I've got like the power of last rights to send someone on past purgatory into the pearly gates or something, no, you know, pastors have no power.

So people shouldn't be insisting on such things from us. All we have is the truth. And that's, and that's kind of getting back to one of the bigger issues that we have here.

It's a lot of people don't want to offer the truth. Okay. Well, I think,

I think that's a good place for us to wrap up the conversation. So Conley, is there anything that you want to say in closing on this topic?

Man, there's, there's so many things. Can I, can I just make like a, a quick summary argument from the doctrine of election?

Yeah, go ahead. So we've talked about a lot of things, but just as quick summary argument from the doctrine of election. If, if you are one who believes that election is a biblical thing, it is a biblical thing.

The Bible talks about it a lot. Then the Bible teaches these four things about election.

The first is that God elects apart from creaturely conditions. He is not partial. And if all infants dying in infancy are elect, then this aspect of election is no longer true.

What's that? It's not unconditional election at that point, basically. Yes. Right. Exactly. Yeah. You have a creaturely condition.

Ah, you know, in this case, everyone universally partial to this particular class of people, right?

God is not partial. Secondly, God elects contrary to the wisdom of man.

First Corinthians one talks about how, how God's wisdom is contrary to the wisdom of man.

His election is contrary to the wisdom of man. This is one where it has man's wisdom written all over it.

This is exactly what people think should happen. This is exactly what people want. Our God's ways, our ways, our, his thoughts, our thoughts.

Typically that is not the case. And I would suggest that, that having man's wisdom written all of this is a good sign that it's not the case.

Third, God elects a few among the many. I gave those statistics earlier. And, and the verse from, from Luke 13, where Jesus asked whether few will be saved.

And he confirms that there's a narrow door. Election is for the few rather than the many.

And this is one where it would be the many rather than the few, if every infant dying in infancy were saved, given when you realize just how many don't make it past the very early stages.

And then lastly, man is unable to manipulate God in election. This is what we were talking about with abortion doctors, right?

So are they actually sending babies to heaven? If they are, man is able to manipulate God in election.

Man can, man can force God's hand. Romans 9, 3, Paul says,

For I wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my kinsmen according to the flesh.

You know, there's this assumption he has here. I can't, I can't trade my own soul for the soul of another, but I wish

I could. But he could have, he could have, if he would have went and killed all the babies, right? Yeah, he could. But that's, that's an argument

I made before, you know, when people brought up the age of accountability, I pointed them to Romans 9. And I said,

Paul would have, he would have damned himself if he could have saved other people. But it seems to me that if age of accountability is true, then

Paul could have done it, right? Yeah, absolutely. And yeah, and this is, this is the most concrete one because it's just so clear that the point of election is that God is doing the choosing, not man.

Man cannot, well, man can preach and hope that God uses them as the means, but man cannot force it to happen by his own sheer will.

And this is something where man actually can, if that were the case, that all infants dying in infancy were saved.

You could work the system, basically. Yeah. Psalm 49, 7 through 9 says, or sorry, verse 9 says, let's see.

Oh, I don't, I don't actually have the whole verse here. Sorry. Anyway, Psalm 49 says that no man can give his life as a ransom for another because his life is, because the life of a man is too costly.

However, God will ransom myself from the power of Sheol for he will receive me. So only

God can ransom our life. We can't exchange our life for another. We can't go and force God's hand by, you know, committing great acts of evil.

There's, there's no way that you can, yeah, that you can make this work. So those, those four aspects of election,

I find to be a very great summary case to show why, if this, if this were true, if all infants dying in infancy were saved, it would just entirely upend the doctrine of election as we know it.

Okay. Yeah. Well, as we close the episode, Conley, just want to thank you again for coming on the show again.

And, you know, we didn't even have to black out your screen and obscure your voice.

You're, you're putting your face out there. So everyone knows exactly who believes this and, you know, just, just, so just as like a courtesy for everyone, why don't you just go ahead and leave your email so that people can quickly send their death threats to you.

But all the, all the joking aside, you know, again, we're really thankful that you came on. It's good to talk about this topic because obviously, you know, anything that has to do with Sal, with salvation and how salvation works and how

God forgives us of our sin and reconciles us back to him is a big deal.

And we need to understand it and understand it well. And we need to, we need to trust that God knows better than we do.

And I think when it comes to this topic, this is a very good exercise in that, in that area.

And being able to say, Hey, you know, I trust God's wisdom more than I trust the wisdom of man.

And I see what the Bible says, and I'm going to resign myself to trust what

God has said in his word over what man has said. And so, so I'm glad that we could, we could talk about this and, and hopefully, hopefully encourage a lot of people and, and especially encourage people to do that, to study his word.

And, and I really do challenge people, you know, I, I just don't see how you can, how you can believe that all children go to heaven when, when

Jesus is constantly making statements, you know, things like no one, no one can get to the father except through me.

Right. And, and how do you, how do you do that? If every baby is going to have, you know, that doesn't seem to, that seems to contradict

Jesus. Right. And, and, and so I think this is a pretty important topic that people really do need to come to terms with.

And, and I think for far too long, we've kind of, I think people have gotten lazy when it comes to this topic and we, and we've sort of gotten scared and allowed this to be that one, that one topic that you just, you either, you either give on and you just, you just do the easy thing.

What you think is the most loving thing, or you just avoid it entirely, you know, so that you don't get in any kind of trouble.

Right. And so, so hopefully this has been an edifying conversation for everyone listening for all you listening.

We want to thank you again for all of the support that you give us weekend and week out, and just allowing us to be able to have these conversations and equip you for the works of ministry.

So we want to thank you and we'll see you again on the next one. This has been another episode of Bible bashed.

We hope you have been encouraged and blessed through our discussion. We thank you for all your support and ask you to continue to like and subscribe to Bible bashed and share our podcast with your friends and on social media, please reach out to us with your questions, pushback and potential topics for us to discuss and future episodes at Bible bashed podcast at gmail .com

and consider supporting us through Patreon. If you would like to be Bible bashed personally, then please know that we also offer free biblical counseling, which you can take advantage of by emailing us.

Now go boldly and obey the truth in the midst of a biblically illiterate world who will be perpetually offended by your every move.